Measuring road safety performance and culture: A comparative study of 39 countries
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Monitoring of road safety performance is essential to effectively address the global road safety problem. Consistent and accurate monitoring allows policymakers to assess the effectiveness of current safety measures, identify emerging risk factors, and develop targeted interventions. Different key performance indicators can be used to monitor road safety performance. In addition to the traditional road safety indicators based on the number of fatalities or injured people in road traffic crashes, complementary road safety performance indicators can be used in relation to vehicles, infrastructure or road users' behaviour. The E -Survey of Road Users' Attitudes (ESRA) is an online survey that aims to collect and analyse comparable data on road safety performance and traffic safety culture across the world. In its three editions (from 2015 to 2023) ESRA has included data from more than 120,000 road users from a total of 68 different countries. This paper focuses on data from the third edition of the ESRA survey (ESRA3), which was conducted in 2023 across 39 countries and includes answers from over 37,000 road users. The objectives are to provide an overview of the ESRA3 survey methodology and to present results related to several road safety topics, such as drink-driving, speeding, or distraction, across different types of road users: car drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, and moped riders/motorcyclists. It examines multiple dimensions of risky behaviours in traffic, including self-declared behaviours, personal acceptability of unsafe behaviours, and support for policy measures. Results show low acceptability of unsafe traffic behaviours like speeding, drink-driving, fatigued driving or using a mobile phone while driving a car – less than 5 % of respondents considered these behaviours acceptable. Notwithstanding the low acceptability, a high percentage of car drivers declared engaging in risky behaviours in traffic: speeding within built-up areas was declared by 37 % to 47 % of car drivers, using a mobile phone by 22 % to 32 %, fatigued driving by 18 % to 20 %, and driving under the influence of alcohol by 10 % to 14 %. As for vulnerable road users, distraction (reading messages/checking social media or listening to music through headphones) was the most declared risky behaviour by pedestrians, the non-use of helmet the most declared by cyclists, and speeding the most declared by moped riders and motorcyclists. Most respondents support policy measures to restrict risky behaviour. The ESRA survey offers a unique database and provides policy makers and researchers with valuable insights into public perception of road safety. • ESRA data helps global road safety monitoring and policy makers to tailor policy measures. • ESRA3 survey gathered data on road safety performance and traffic safety culture from 37,000 road users across 39 countries. • Minority accepts unsafe traffic behaviour and majority supports policy measures that limit risky behaviours in traffic. • Speeding (37–47 %), followed by mobile phone use (22–32 %) are the most frequently declared risky car driving behaviours. • Top risk behaviour of vulnerable road users: for pedestrians distraction, for cyclists no helmet, for moto riders speeding.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".